No choice is fated or necessarily predictable (because of the infinite level of complexity involved in thought), but you can definitely say that everything is determined by what precedes it. — CasKev

Ok, everything is fated but it isn't. Some call this compatibilism, others call it having your cake and eat it, yet others might call it muddy and strange. No doubt, others think it is absolutely brilliant. If you are satisfied, may the gods be kind to you.

@VagabondSpectre @Rich

When I think of something being fated, I think of someone saying 'It was meant to be'. As in: It was fate that I met my girlfriend. I relate it to there being an overarching storybook reason for why something happens, as opposed to just being dependent on what came before it.

The main knee jerk reaction to determinism is to somehow feel that because our choices are predetermined they are therefore less valuable or important to perform well. Eating a bar of chocolate is a pleasurable experience for me, even if it's just a determined chemical reaction in my brain, and so more chocolate bars is what I'll try to get. It might be pre-determined how successful I will be, but I do know that if I don't try success is impossible. — VagabondSpectre

My knee jerk reaction is that I was never religious (spiritual yes) and no reason to start now just because someone has come up with a new story of how our lives are fated. Suits lots of people though, but usually they want God and not Natural Laws. It's a question of taste. As for me, I continue to make choices in my life as I bring creativity into my experiences.

That's a fair enough distinction, although I don't personally see evidence that any (decent) writer is behind it all...

My knee jerk reaction is that I was never religious (spiritual yes) and no reason to start now just because someone has come up with a new story of how our lives are fated. Suits lots of people though, but usually they want God and not Natural Laws. It's a question of taste. As for me, I continue to make choices in my life as I bring creativity into my experiences. — Rich

But don't you cling to the notion of hard free will like a religious person when presented with evidence that diminishes it? (hormones impacting decision making for instance).

I don't actually claim to know that determinism is true, in fact I tentatively accept it not only because there is some good evidence for it, but also because there are several moral upshots in doing so (and with no apparent downside). Since I accept determinism I'm able to view moral failings of individuals as the fault of uncontrollable circumstances rather than applying some form of inherent moral guilt. What this does to moral reactions to crime (for instance) is to remove "revenge and punishment for the sake of punishment" as a reason or goal of incarceration. Incarceration then becomes a tool to separate dangerous individuals from society for our protection, and (ideally) a place which can rehabilitate them (remedy whatever factors it is that lead them to crime in the first place). Forgiving people is a very easy thing to do for a determinist because no individual can be blamed. In life we need to hold dangerous individuals pragmatically accountable for their actions, but we do not need to misunderstand their nature and torture them because of that misunderstanding as current penal systems tend to do...

What I do know is true as a determinist that it would make no difference whether or actions come from determined physical interactions in the brain and body or from quantum indeterminacy of particles in the brain, "free-will" such as you would like it to exist has not been established. Behaving according to some wave property or the changing spin of a quantum particle isn't free will, it's some kind of quantum-random will whose actual mechanics you cannot explain.

But don't you cling to the notion of hard free will like a religious person when presented with evidence that diminishes it? (hormones impacting decision making for instance). — VagabondSpectre

There is zero evidence for determinism other than the cute story cooked up a couple of hundred years ago which was in turn decimated by quantum physics much to Einstein's chagrin.

As for me, I am quite comfortable making choices in my life. If your comfortable with a gated life, go for it, just don't try to use it v as an excuse, that's all. It's never worked.

How come our computers work so reliably? Why don't quantum fluctuations cause them to exhibit free and random behavior?

The evidence for determinism is every physical law we have been accurately able to describe.

How come our computers work so reliably? Why don't quantum fluctuations cause them to exhibit free and random behavior? — VagabondSpectre

They don't. They fail in unpredictable ways all the time. That is why computer systems have backups.

Do they fail or behave randomly because of quantum fluctuations?

No, only a quantum computer would be affected by this...

Hint: the human brain is not a quantum computer.

Quantum is the substrate of all events and we continue to use other theories as a matter of convenience. Computer technology developed around quantum theory. Events aren't random, they are probabilistic because the universe has habits. Events are unpredictable. If you don't believe me, go to Amazon reviews.

the universe has habits — Rich

I would very much you to explain how the wave property of quantum particles causes "free" behavior in computers, OR, i would very much like you to explain how the wave property of quantum particles causes you to have "free will".

hint: "try making a decision and see what happens..." is obviously unpersuasive...

OK. It's over. Thanks. Enjoy your life.

It is not. I've read enough about it to understand there are lots of questions and issues to consider when using the apparatus and setting up the device depending upon what the experimenter is studying. But for some reason, you are using this as evidence of what??

In any case MZI is just an apparatus, not an experiment. — Rich

Sending a photon through the MZI is the experiment.

The main issue to consider is that the photon always ends up at detector 1. With certainty. This result has no classical explanation.

It also cannot be explained by supposing that the relative quantum states describing each photon path are mere possibilities, since possible states cannot cause real interference effects.

So the experiment is evidence that the relative quantum states described by the Schrodinger equation have physically real referents.

So the experiment is evidence that the relative quantum states described by the Schrodinger equation have physically real referents. — Andrew M

Provide references and I'll see if I have the time to study it. Still, quantum theory remains probabilistic though in Bohm's model there are real causal agents - including "information".

As for me, I am quite comfortable making choices in my life. — Rich

Can you tell me on what you based your last major decision?

My last major decision was to answer this post. I just it and decided to answer it. I would say it was a rather spontaneous action. It just happened. Sometimes I don't respond. Sometimes I wait to respond. The amount of time I wait is rather unpredictable.

Unpredictable yes, because we are nowhere near being able to accurately model all of the variables that go into brain function.

In this case, perhaps the short response time was based on your desire to prove your point. The words you chose were those you expected to have the best chance of proving your point. Maybe you have a need to be right that is based in the human need for dominance, or because your parents never took you seriously.

The point is that everything that went into your decision is based on something that existed prior to the decision. Even seemingly random events have a preceding chain of events leading up to them.

Unpredictable yes, because we are nowhere near being able to accurately model all of the variables that go into brain function. — CasKev

Listen, quantum theory says that unpredictably is inherent in the universe. All you are doing is parroting some ancient story that was concocted as cute theory which never had a scintilla of evidence to support it.

I can't argue with faith. No one can and shouldn't. Now, why don't you pray to the Laws of Nature that I am saved and see the light? Discussion is useless. My fate has been sealed since the Genesis of the Big Bang.

"My fate has been sealed since the Genesis of the Big Bang."

So you're for Determinism now?

Does it sound like I believe in the God of the Big Bang?

Determinism is the exact equivalent to Calvinism. Simply replacing God with the phrase Natural Laws does not make a religion different.

As for me, I don't have a need for God or Natural Laws to define my life. I have a creative mind that makes choices.

Interested to see how you would account for 'free choice' within a universe that (seemingly) adheres to a directional flow of time without committing yourself to an infinite regress or accepting randomness.

I don't recognize any issues. Memory evolves and this is what we feel as the internal flow of duration (real time). Choices and learning from these choices (memory) is the process of creative evolution (duration).

Finally a scientist who actually studied Bohmian Mechanics and Bell's Inequality. For me, it's a relief. I'm booking this for the next time someone comes along and claims Bohmian Mechanics is in anyway deterministic. For gosh sakes, just look at the equation.

https://www.quora.com/Does-Bohmian-Mechanics-claim-quantum-randomness-is-really-deterministic-chaos

I have a creative mind that makes choices. Choices and learning from these choices (memory) is the process of creative evolution. — Rich

So you can admit that there is memory built from the experiential results of choices, on which future choices are based. Yet you seem to insist on there being this other source of creative intelligence that somehow influences decision-making and generates ideas out of nowhere.

To me, there doesn't need to be an additional source - everything required for decision-making and idea creation is accounted for by memory and instinct. The value you place on this source of creative intelligence seems god-like and ego-based - needing to be more than the intelligent animal that you are, and needing to believe that you are more than just a sum of your past experiences and biological beginnings.

So you can admit that there is memory built from the experiential results of choices, on which future choices are based. Yet you seem to insist on there being this other source of creative intelligence that somehow influences decision-making and generates ideas out of nowhere. — CasKev

It is exactly, precisely, without and additions or substractions, the way we experience it in every day life. There is no supernatural God or supernatural Laws of Nature. There is our memory, our creative mind (making choices and introducing novelty), and our will (effecting choices). I am sorry if existence is not a huge philosophical tome, but it is fun and interesting if one chooses to be creative.

Bottom line, life is exactly what one experiences.

life is exactly what one experiences — Rich

Every time I make a choice, I am considering past choices, results, and experiences. Basic instincts also weigh in to the decision. All of these things are pre-existing - there is no factor x that pushes me one way or another. So the choice, though sometimes highly unpredictable, is determined by everything that came before it.

I am considering — CasKev

Congratulations, you now recognize your mind at work.

So determinism wins!

Not really, but I love the way your mind denies itself and then glorifies itself for its victory. Kind of contortionist, but that is what creativity is all about.

I tell you what. Give yourself about one lifetime to ruminate over 'I am considering" and then get back to this thread.

There's that x factor creativity again. All new ideas stem from the inputs that precede them - they aren't magically generated from nothingness.

Give yourself about one lifetime to ruminate over 'I am considering" and then get back to this thread. — Rich

We start taking time to consider as we gain life experience, because we learn that snap decisions based on instinct and emotion aren't always the best ones. This time spent considering doesn't mean that the eventual choice isn't dependent on preceding factors - it just means that the alternatives are judged as nearly equal in value.